Archive for the ‘Black Racism’ Category

On February 4th, the night before the Super Bowl between the Atlanta Falcons and the New England Patriots, comedian and Saturday Night Live actor Michael Che called Boston the most racist city Ive ever been to, during the shows popular Weekend Update segment.

The comment didnt garner a lot of attention at the time, but when he repeated his statement on March 23rd at Boston University, it was received with much more acrimony from White folks who felt he had crossed the line and needed to apologize.

Che had apparently committed the nouveau unspeakable sin of labelling a White person, a predominantly-White location and a historically White institution, racist.

While Ches comments became nationwide fodder for online and offline debates regarding the appropriateness of labelling someone racist, hate crimes were being committed against visible minorities all over the country (you know, actual racism). And in six and a halfweeks between Ches original comment and the latest backlash it caused, there has been ample amounts of racist savagery.

This month, 66-year-old Timothy Caughman was stabbed to death by a 28-year-old White man whom, after being arrested, admitted that he came to New York specifically to live out his fantasy of killing Black men, especially so White women would stop dating us. His racist rhetoric not only closely resembles Charleston church shooter Dylan Roofs, but it also mirrors the talking points of Americas historic legacy of anti-Blackness. Its one that traverses many different states throughout the nation.

Yet, instead of analyzing that harsh and tragic reality, we must allocate precious time to redirecting the conversation towards actual victims of hate crimes, not those who feel they are because the truth has been hurled at them.

Only for them to leave the conversation pretending that anti-Black racism is an unverifiable fallacy.

Then we have to search for easily digestible numbers to progress the conversation, since explaining our very real experiences of peril is not enough. But even if Che showed everyone the factsin 2017, the LGBTQ community and Black folks werethe most victimized by hate crimes in Bostonhis detractors would just find another way to minimize or ignore the evidence laying in front of them. Theyre not in it for the truth. Theyre in it for gaslighting the victimized.

When White folks make the label of racism the crux of the conversation, they restrict the discourse from progressing to a thorough examination of all the many, very real forms of restrictive and violent racism that plagues our society. By making the claim of racism more egregious than racist behavior, it obfuscates the discussion and leads us away from ever finding meaningful solutions to racialized incursion by framing the word as a subjective pejorative, or even worse, a baseless insult.

Its critical that the collective Black community pushes back against the idea that we must diminish our need for a serious dissection of the race problem affecting America and the world at large to accommodate a deluge of fake ass White tears. Those who care more about being called racist than the existence of actual racism are simply just trying to deflect and detract attention away from an issue that determines our safety and progress. And at the rate that hate crime and populism is spreading throughout the globe, theres no damn time to debate the obvious when actual lives are at stake.

Lincoln Anthony Blades blogs daily on his site, ThisIsYourConscious.com. Hes author of the book, Youre Not A Victim, Youre A Volunteer. He can be reached on Twitter @lincolnablades and on Facebook at Lincoln Anthony Blades.

The BDS movement does not tolerate any act or discourse which adopts or promotes, among others, anti-Black racism, anti-Arab racism, Islamophobia, anti-Semitism, sexism, xenophobia or homophobia. (Guillaume Paumier, CC-BY)

Palestinians are reaffirming that the movement to boycott Israel is part of the global struggle against racism and all forms of bigotry, including anti-Semitism and Islamophobia.

The global boycott, divestment and sanctions (BDS) movement for freedom, justice and equality of the Palestinian people is an inclusive, nonviolent human rights movement that rejects all forms of racism and racial discrimination, the Palestinian BDS National Committee (BNC) said on Tuesday.

We reject Zionism, as it constitutes the racist and discriminatory ideological pillar of Israels regime of occupation, settler-colonialism and apartheid that has deprived the Palestinian people of its fundamental human rights since 1948, the BNC, the civil society coalition that leads the BDS movement, states.

Since its inception in 2005, the global, Palestinian-led BDS movement has been anchored in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. It is an inclusive human rights movement that categorically rejects all forms of racism and discrimination, Rafeef Ziadah, a member of the BNC secretariat, told The Electronic Intifada. This key anti-racism statement reiterates this long-held principle at a time when the racist and xenophobic far-right is rising in Washington, DC, Tel Aviv and many places in between.

On the centenary of the patently racist and colonial Balfour Declaration which offered Palestine to Jewish-European settlers, disregarding its indigenous Arab population it is crucial to highlight the timeless values of inclusion and opposition to all forms of racism, Ziadah added.

The BNCs statement places the Palestinian cause in the broader context of anti-colonial struggle: We strongly condemn apartheid, genocide, slavery, colonial exploitation and ethnic cleansing, which are crimes against humanity that are founded on racism and racial supremacy, and we call for the right of their victims, including descendants, to full reparation.

The BNC affirms that the BDS movement does not tolerate any act or discourse which adopts or promotes, among others, anti-Black racism, anti-Arab racism, Islamophobia, anti-Semitism, sexism, xenophobia or homophobia.

The principles of the BDS movement call for proactive solidarity with oppressed communities worldwide and with all the victims of racist acts and rhetoric, as ours is a common cause, the BNC adds.

There are growing expressions of this commonality. In 2015, more than 1,000 Black artists, intellectuals and organizations recognized the racism that characterizes Israels treatment of Palestinians and called for unified action against anti-Blackness, white supremacy and Zionism.

Israel lobby groups have strongly condemned Black support for Palestinian rights and have sought to disrupt such solidarity.

While anti-racism has long been affirmed by Palestinian activists, Israel and its surrogates have made a concerted effort to smear the Palestine solidarity movement as motivated by prejudice.

This logic treats Israeli supremacy and its denial of Palestinian rights on ethno-religious grounds as if they form part of a legitimate Israeli-Jewish identity that is bound to be cherished and respected, instead of resisted and replaced with a system that affords equal rights and protections to all.

A key tactic has been to try to enshrine in legislation and institutional policies around the world a discredited definition of anti-Semitism that treats criticism of Israel and its state ideology Zionism as forms of anti-Jewish bigotry.

In recent months, US lawmakers have sought to adopt this definition as part of the so-called Anti-Semitism Awareness bill.

Even the lead author of the controversial definition, Kenneth Stern, is warning lawmakers that its adoption would be an unconstitutional infringement on free speech.

Secular and religiously observant Jewish communities have also long rejected Israels propaganda conflating Jewish belief and identity on the one hand, with Zionism and support for Israel, on the other.

Israel and its lobby groups nonetheless claim that by opposing Israeli abuses the BDS movement is anti-Semitic. Israel has used this smear to push for draconian restrictions on free speech.

But a broad pushback by supporters of Palestinian rights is scoring successes.

Last year, the European Union joined several of its member governments in recognizing the right of its citizens to boycott Israel.

The EU stands firm in protecting freedom of expression and freedom of association in line with the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, which is applicable on EU member states territory, including with regard to BDS, Federica Mogherini, the 28-member blocs foreign policy chief told the European Parliament in September.

As Israels regime of occupation, settler-colonialism and apartheid sheds the farcical pretense of democracy and adopts more and more racist and exclusionary laws, the BDS movement is further highlighting its inclusiveness and rejection of all forms of racism, the BNCs Ziadah said. Our struggle for freedom, justice and equality is organically connected to global struggles for racial, social, economic, gender, climate and other forms of justice.

See what Switzerland did today in regards to bds?

To be fair, it was the Swiss National Council (the lower chamber of the legislature) not the people of Switzerland, just their elected representatives.

I’m old enough to remember when Israel claimed solidarity with the peoples of formerly colonized lands. Let’s ask Zionist groups professing anti-racist credentials- assuming that tactic is still in operation- to join in the struggle against anti-black racism and Islamophobic bigotry in the U.S. These are organizations with tremendous financial resources and political connections. Isn’t it about time that the Anti-Defamation League and the World Zionist Organization, to name but two, lent their resources to combating the scourge of racism in the country from which they derive their funding? Their avowed aims of securing the welfare of Jews and constructing a military garrison state in the Middle East have been achieved. Will they now devote themselves to expanding the rights of the oppressed elsewhere (if not in Palestine)?

A black student group at York University in Canada is hosting a first aid training session only for black students and describes the accusations of racism for barringwhite students as anti-black racism.

The student group,York United Black Students Alliance, got into hot water after a student, Jake Janic, complained publicly via a student Facebook group. Janicposted a picture of the poster which read: catering to black students only.

My attention was brought to this poster because I was actually interested in getting my recert[ification] in first aid. Its a skill everyone should know. Apparently my skin color is an issue though, Janic wrote.

The poster offering CPR and first aid training is the official poster, as the black student group tweeted the posterthemselves on their official twitter account.

The group responded to the backlash, saying thatwhile anyone should be able to access such training, people complaining about the event are doing because of anti-black racism.

It has come to the attention of the York United Black Students Alliance that we have anti-black racism in our midst, the statement read. Offering programs such as these to our community members is by no way in any means racist.

The York University group added that offering CPR and first aid training exclusivelyfor black students is both a responsibility and a duty because of the oppression at the university.

York University since its inception has had a longstanding history of erasure of black bodies, black students, and black space on this campus, the statement added.

Unable to put down the controversy, theblack student group issued another statement slamming whiteness and claiming its idiotic for white students to ask to be allowed to attend the training session.

For white folks to claim that they need additional space with whiteness subsumed in the entirety of the Canadian context is idiotic. The idea that some folks believe that white supremacy needs to be perpetuated by carving out even more space for white folks is redundant, the group wrote.

York Universitys black student group is offering CPR and first aid training exclusively to black students, defending their discrimination by saying it is part of their DUTY to the black community.

An image obtained by MRCTV shows the York United Black Students Alliance is offering the CPR and first aid training catering to black students only:

A photo on the groups Twitter page confirms the event is only for black students.

In a statement issued on their Facebook page, York United Black Students Alliance blamed anti-black racism for the outrage over their program. The group explained that while learning CPR is something anyone should be able to access, their services are strictly for the black community and that is not, in fact, racist:

It has come to the attention of the York United Black Student’s Alliance that we have anti-black racism in our midst.

YUBSA recently began an initiative in which we saw the necessity and usefulness of offering CPR certifications to our community members at a reduced cost. This is because being trained on how to properly perform CPR is an important and pivotal undertaking that anyone should be able to access as they offer practical use in life and give an individual the opportunity to potentially save the life of another community member.

In our efforts to offer this to our black community members, our endeavors are met with resistance and anti-black racism.

YUBSA wants to make this very clear,

Offering programs such as these to our community members is by no way in any means racist.

The group defended their decision to only offer the program to the black community by mentioning York Universitys alleged longstanding history of erasure of black bodies, black students, and black space on this campus. According to the group, this means they now have a DUTY to only offer services only to black students:

WE as a community service group we’re created in 1996 because of the lack of representation that the black students had at York University historically. York University since it’s inception has had a longstanding history of erasure of black bodies, black students, and black space on this campus.

Our willingness to carve out space on this campus is an ongoing DUTY of our service group. Our efforts to create more accessible means for our community members to access these programs is a RESPONSIBILITY that we the YUBSA executive have. WE are chosen to represent the interests of the black students at York from an anti-oppressive framework.

The group ended their statement by calling for people to keep their anti-black racism in check and for people to do better.

The group also addressed the outrage on Twitter, again stating anti-black racism is the cause for the uproar, and claiming the groups services are catered towards black students for a reason:

In the midst of the controversy, the York United Black Students Alliance issued another statement claiming whites are not a marginalized group so they do not need their own spaces on campus.

The York United Black Students Alliance also encouraged people to file human rights complaints against them so they can collect the receipts of your anti-black racism that York continuously fails to acknowledge is ever present on this campus:

For white folks to claim that they need additional space with whiteness subsumed in the entirety of the Canadian context is idiotic. The idea that some folks believe that white supremacy needs to be perpetuated by carving out even more space for white folks is redundant. The fact that we as black students who are cognizant of this history of colonization and exploitation are faced with resistance for wanting to provide support for black community members, when other service groups and cultural student groups do this as well, is a testament to the significant anti-blackness that YUBSA and our black community members face every single day. Do better.

To the folks who claim they want to file complaints to human rights for prioritizing Black folks in our most recent endeavor. We encourage this. It saves us the trouble of having to collect the receipts of your anti-black racism that York continuously fails to acknowledge is ever present on this campus.

York United Black Students Alliances website claims the purpose of their organization is to provide our Black brothers and sisters the opportunity to access resources that may be unavailable to them otherwise. Their Facebook states the group is an official non-profit, student-run, Pan-Africanist organization that acts as a representative body on behalf of the Black student population at York University, which also operates as agents for social, political, and economic change for the Black community.

Thank you for supporting MRCTV! As a tax-deductible, charitable organization, we rely on the support of our readers to keep us running! Keep MRCTV going with your gift here!

Editors Note: Ranier Maningding is a copywriter and mastermind behind the social justice page The Love Life of an Asian Guy. The opinions expressed in this piece are solely his own.

Designed as a two-for-one special, Get Out was both a brilliant horror film with terrifying visuals and a scathing critique of racism in white America. This two-faced presentation meant that if youre woke (aka, you understand how race operates) you were tasked with uncovering all racial symbolism hidden in the film and making sure you didnt shit your pants from all the scary bits.

That feel when you simultaneously spot the racial symbolism and shit your pants.

As an Asian-American, I walked into Get Outwith the expectation that Id be watching a public roast of white America. A horror movie that depicts cheeky white folks as evil while illuminating the dangers of racial microaggressions? Hell yea!

I was pumped for this movie. I walked into that movie theater on opening day with a stride in my step, and two bubble tea drinks stashed inside my fiancees purse. ITS ON LIKE KUBLAI KHAN! But just as I was sipping my hypothetical and literal tea, forty minutes into the film during the cocktail party scene I saw this shit:

Is that an Asian dude?!

My race-baiting senses flared up. Wait, why is there an Asian dude in this movie? If Get Out is a movie about the mental and physical abuse that white folks inflict on Black people, why did Jordan Peele include an Asian character?

Heres why.

(SPOILER ALERT: If you havent seen this film, turn around, have a hot pocket, and piss off. Massive spoilers ahead.)

Get Out tackles the terrifying experiences of being Black in racist white America, and the inclusion of the Asian man reveals that, while Asians may not play a lead role in white supremacy, our willingness to participate in anti-blackness makes us a supporting character.

Why Was There Only One Asian Character?

The inclusion of the Asian character was a powerful message, but why did Jordan Peele add one? Why not five? If subtlety was the objective, then one Asian character was enough, but I dont think Peele was trying to be discreet about his commentary on Asians. Instead, the decision to cast one Asian guy mimicked the actual demographics of Asians in America.

According to the Pew Research Center, Asian-Americans make up 5.8% of the country. Compared to Black Americans who stand at 13.3%, Asians are even more of a demographic minority. By adding one solitary Asian character, Peele highlights the fact that even though Asians are outnumbered by Black folks, we still take on the role as oppressors by standing on the side of white supremacy and anti-Blackness.

Why Did The Asian Man Ask About The African-American Experience?

The cocktail party scene was a brilliant way to demonstrate the racial microaggressions and dehumanization that Black folks experience. Upon meeting the white party guests, protagonist Chris (Daniel Kaluuya) was asked a number of rude, racist questions. These specific questions said a lot about the questioner: an old white man who could no longer do sports asked if Chris could swing a golf club like Tiger Woods; an older white woman with a dying husband asked if the stereotypes were true about the big Black penis. When the Asian character made his grand entrance, he asked:

Is the African-American experience an advantage or disadvantage?

To understand why the Asian man asked this, you have to consider Claire Jean Kims theory of racial triangulation. Racial triangulation posits that Asians exist on a spectrum where they are 1.) perceived as better than Blacks (but not as good as whites) and 2.) categorized as perpetual foreigners who will never be accepted as full Americans. According to racial triangulation, Asians are in racial limbo, trying desperately to achieve whiteness and status as real Americans by stepping on the heads of Black folks.

So when the Asian man asked Chris, Is the African-American experience an advantage or disadvantage? he wasnt just making small talk, he was wrestling with the decision of whether or not it would be better to trade bodies with Chris and experience anti-Blackness or stay the same and live life as an Asian man in America and experience xenophobia.

Whats Up with The Asian Dude and The Bingo Scene?

The infamous bingo scene in Get Outis a modern interpretation of slave auctions. Slave auctions allowed white slave masters to bid on individual slaves as young as three-months-old or bid on entire families of seven or more Black people. So why did Jordan Peele insert the Asian guy into this scene?

Because historically, Asian-Americans also owned Black slaves.

Though not as common as white slave masters, some Asian-Americans purchased Black slaves. Born in Thailand and forced to join the circus, conjoined twins Chang and Eng Bunker (known as the Original Siamese twins) eventually made enough money to gain naturalization and purchase a plantation with Black slaves. The wealth and socialite status of Chang and Eng propelled them to a position where they could purchase Black slaves and even marry white women. Asian participation in slavery goes back even further than the Bunker twins with some sources citing that Kublai Khan and leaders of the Yuan Dynasty also purchased Black slaves.

Painting of Kublai Khan and his Black boy Black servant

If you interpret the bingo scene from a hyperbolic lens, you can also argue that the Asian man and his white constituents were participating in the appropriation and degradation of Black bodies a practice weve seen with K-Pops appropriation of Black culture and the violent crimes of Asian-American officers Daniel Holtzclaw and Peter Liang.

Asians Must Acknowledge Their Role in Anti-Black Racism

If youre an Asian person and reading this, you probably feel pretty damn shitty right now.

Good. You should. As Asians, we should feel shitty about Jordan Peele inserting us into his movie. He didnt add a Latino character, or an Indigenous woman, or a Muslim-American. He added an Asian. He wrote this character into the script, sent out a casting call, hired an Asian actor, and gave him lines to read.

The Asian character wasnt added on accident. He served a purpose.

Now its our job, as Asians, to recognize our complacency under the canopy of white supremacy and realize that like Black folks, we have nothing to gain by siding with whiteness. Its time we wake the fuck up and Get Out of this cycle of anti-Blackness.

Now that hes gone from the White House (forever, one hopes), it is time to ascertain when Barack Obama became an overt black racist. Some will opine that he always has been, which may be true, but is less important than the racial divisiveness that occurred on the national scene between 2009 and 2017. I shall eschew commenting on his record as a youth, a community organizer, and an Illinois politico. Lets stick to his legacy at the national level.

Some say Obamas dislike of America undergirds what he did, but anti-white sentiments better explain his behavior, especially after 2012.

The historian in me says its too soon to have the perspective needed to make any definitive judgments on this topic. The political scientist in me, on the other hand, says Obama has a record and we need to explore it. Since my ultimate graduate degree is in Political Science, I shall apply that disciplines standards.

Obama emerged on the national scene with his keynote address at the 2004 Democratic National Convention. We begin there.

If you read the transcript of that speech, youd believe that the Barack Obama of 2004 sincerely believed in Americas unity. Aspiring candidates for national office give lip service to views that will play in Peoria, but set that aside. At one point, he told the delegates [t]heres not a black America and white America and Latino America and Asian America; theres the United States of America. He added, [w]e are one people, all of us pledging allegiance to the stars and stripes, all of us defending the United States of America.

In his only direct reference to race, Obama criticized the slander that says a black youth with a book is acting white.

Elected to the U.S. Senate in 2006, Obama was actively seeking the presidency within months. The gist of his campaign in 2007 and 2008, insofar as it related to the race issue, was to be post-racial. As a product of a mixed-race relationship, Obama could not escape the question of race, which was made even more pertinent following revelations of incendiary remarks by his long-time pastor, Jeremiah Wright. Obama tried to defuse the more divisive implications of Wrights rants in a major address given in mid-March, 2008.

Although his acolytes in the mainstream media (MSM) quickly opined that Obama had defused the issue, a careful reading of that speech suggests otherwise.

Although, at points, Obama seemed to challenge Wrights belief that racism was endemic and a perpetual feature of American society, he also asserted that the Constitution, even though it contained the principles that would end the institution, was stained by this nations original sin of slavery. He also asserted that he could no more disown Wright than he could either the black community or his white grandmother. Obama stated that blacks and whites all want to move in the same direction, but he eventually made clear that America had much to do to perfect that part of its union pertaining to race, presumably because Americans have never really worked though racial questions.

Obama also called for black men to take more responsibility for the children they sired in his 2008 Fathers Day speech in Chicago. That speech, however, caused an outcry among some African American spokesmen. Subsequent Fathers Day addresses did not have overt racial connections.

Even after he became Chief Executive, Obama tried to maintain a faade of racial even-handedness, although his nomination of Eric Holder to be Attorney General should have alerted us to potential problems. Almost as soon as Holder became AG, he refused to imprison two New Black Panthers found guilty of voter intimidation in Philadelphia. It wasnt long before the Obama/Holder-led Department of Justice manifested an unwillingness to prosecute African Americans accused of racially motivated violations of whites civil liberties.

Thereafter, Obamas even-handedness in matters of race became less evident.

In the aftermath of white Hispanic George Zimmermans killing of African American Trayvon Martin in 2012, for example, Obama made his sympathies for the latter very obvious. He blurted out that, [i]f I had a son, he would look like Trayvon. The Obama administration and the DOJ provided assistance to the prosecutions ultimately unsuccessful effort to convict Zimmerman.

The Obama administration also pursued one-sided policies in the aftermath of the killing of African American Michael Brown by a white Ferguson (MO) policeman on August 9 2014. When race riots immediately broke out, the Obama/Holder-led DOJ sent agents to investigate the gentle giants death, but had to accept a grand jurys decision not to charge Darren Wilson, a decision followed by another round of race riots.

By late summer, early fall of 2014, any sense that Obama was interested in racial healing was threadbare.

One consequence of the crisis in Ferguson was the emergence of the Black Lives Matter movement, an overtly black racist organization which had begun after the Zimmerman-Martin incident, but had not received nationwide attention.

Shortly after a raucus demonstration against police in New York City, Obama invited leaders of this racist clique to visit the White House.

Public opinion polls provide insights into public perceptions of trends in American race relations. Look at the Gallup poll, which asked the same question on several occasions: Would you say relations between whites and blacks are very good, somewhat good, somewhat bad, or very bad.

In mid-2008, 70% of whites said race relations were very/somewhat good, 29% opined they were somewhat/very bad, and 2% had no opinion. In mid 2016, 55% thought they were very/somewhat good, 44% opined they were somewhat/very bad, and 1% had no opinion. Among blacks in 2008, 61% thought race relations were very/somewhat good, 37% believed they were somewhat/very bad, and 1% had no opinion. By 2016, 49% of blacks still thought race relations were very/somewhat good, but 50% said they were somewhat/very bad, and less than one percent had no opinion.

Some polls show larger shifts in opinions about the state of race relations before and after Obama entered the White House, and they are always toward worsened perspectives, especially among African Americans. Far from being a racial uniter, Obama was a divider.

In short, both whites and blacks views of race relations soured while Obama was Chief Executive. If Obama believed that by becoming more overtly racialist, he would witness improvements in blacks perceptions of race relations, he had to be disappointed. One wonders, therefore, what the price of a presidents overt black racism is.

Obamas record on race relations indicates what may happen when the MSM refuses to vet an aspiring presidential candidate.

Now that hes gone from the White House (forever, one hopes), it is time to ascertain when Barack Obama became an overt black racist. Some will opine that he always has been, which may be true, but is less important than the racial divisiveness that occurred on the national scene between 2009 and 2017. I shall eschew commenting on his record as a youth, a community organizer, and an Illinois politico. Lets stick to his legacy at the national level.

Some say Obamas dislike of America undergirds what he did, but anti-white sentiments better explain his behavior, especially after 2012.

The historian in me says its too soon to have the perspective needed to make any definitive judgments on this topic. The political scientist in me, on the other hand, says Obama has a record and we need to explore it. Since my ultimate graduate degree is in Political Science, I shall apply that disciplines standards.

Obama emerged on the national scene with his keynote address at the 2004 Democratic National Convention. We begin there.

If you read the transcript of that speech, youd believe that the Barack Obama of 2004 sincerely believed in Americas unity. Aspiring candidates for national office give lip service to views that will play in Peoria, but set that aside. At one point, he told the delegates [t]heres not a black America and white America and Latino America and Asian America; theres the United States of America. He added, [w]e are one people, all of us pledging allegiance to the stars and stripes, all of us defending the United States of America.

In his only direct reference to race, Obama criticized the slander that says a black youth with a book is acting white.

Elected to the U.S. Senate in 2006, Obama was actively seeking the presidency within months. The gist of his campaign in 2007 and 2008, insofar as it related to the race issue, was to be post-racial. As a product of a mixed-race relationship, Obama could not escape the question of race, which was made even more pertinent following revelations of incendiary remarks by his long-time pastor, Jeremiah Wright. Obama tried to defuse the more divisive implications of Wrights rants in a major address given in mid-March, 2008.

Although his acolytes in the mainstream media (MSM) quickly opined that Obama had defused the issue, a careful reading of that speech suggests otherwise.

Although, at points, Obama seemed to challenge Wrights belief that racism was endemic and a perpetual feature of American society, he also asserted that the Constitution, even though it contained the principles that would end the institution, was stained by this nations original sin of slavery. He also asserted that he could no more disown Wright than he could either the black community or his white grandmother. Obama stated that blacks and whites all want to move in the same direction, but he eventually made clear that America had much to do to perfect that part of its union pertaining to race, presumably because Americans have never really worked though racial questions.

Obama also called for black men to take more responsibility for the children they sired in his 2008 Fathers Day speech in Chicago. That speech, however, caused an outcry among some African American spokesmen. Subsequent Fathers Day addresses did not have overt racial connections.

Even after he became Chief Executive, Obama tried to maintain a faade of racial even-handedness, although his nomination of Eric Holder to be Attorney General should have alerted us to potential problems. Almost as soon as Holder became AG, he refused to imprison two New Black Panthers found guilty of voter intimidation in Philadelphia. It wasnt long before the Obama/Holder-led Department of Justice manifested an unwillingness to prosecute African Americans accused of racially motivated violations of whites civil liberties.

Thereafter, Obamas even-handedness in matters of race became less evident.

In the aftermath of white Hispanic George Zimmermans killing of African American Trayvon Martin in 2012, for example, Obama made his sympathies for the latter very obvious. He blurted out that, [i]f I had a son, he would look like Trayvon. The Obama administration and the DOJ provided assistance to the prosecutions ultimately unsuccessful effort to convict Zimmerman.

The Obama administration also pursued one-sided policies in the aftermath of the killing of African American Michael Brown by a white Ferguson (MO) policeman on August 9 2014. When race riots immediately broke out, the Obama/Holder-led DOJ sent agents to investigate the gentle giants death, but had to accept a grand jurys decision not to charge Darren Wilson, a decision followed by another round of race riots.

By late summer, early fall of 2014, any sense that Obama was interested in racial healing was threadbare.

One consequence of the crisis in Ferguson was the emergence of the Black Lives Matter movement, an overtly black racist organization which had begun after the Zimmerman-Martin incident, but had not received nationwide attention.

Shortly after a raucus demonstration against police in New York City, Obama invited leaders of this racist clique to visit the White House.

Public opinion polls provide insights into public perceptions of trends in American race relations. Look at the Gallup poll, which asked the same question on several occasions: Would you say relations between whites and blacks are very good, somewhat good, somewhat bad, or very bad.

In mid-2008, 70% of whites said race relations were very/somewhat good, 29% opined they were somewhat/very bad, and 2% had no opinion. In mid 2016, 55% thought they were very/somewhat good, 44% opined they were somewhat/very bad, and 1% had no opinion. Among blacks in 2008, 61% thought race relations were very/somewhat good, 37% believed they were somewhat/very bad, and 1% had no opinion. By 2016, 49% of blacks still thought race relations were very/somewhat good, but 50% said they were somewhat/very bad, and less than one percent had no opinion.

Some polls show larger shifts in opinions about the state of race relations before and after Obama entered the White House, and they are always toward worsened perspectives, especially among African Americans. Far from being a racial uniter, Obama was a divider.

In short, both whites and blacks views of race relations soured while Obama was Chief Executive. If Obama believed that by becoming more overtly racialist, he would witness improvements in blacks perceptions of race relations, he had to be disappointed. One wonders, therefore, what the price of a presidents overt black racism is.

Obamas record on race relations indicates what may happen when the MSM refuses to vet an aspiring presidential candidate.

A historical conjecture of solidarity has arrived at Ohio States campus. For the first time in OSUs history, a Black-Palestine solidarity resolution, Issue 2, has been submitted for undergraduate students to vote on. Issue 2 calls upon OSU to revoke and end its investments in companies complicit in the occupation of Palestine such as G4S, Caterpillar and HP as well as its investments in private prison companies such asG4S, GEO and CoreCivic. If you find personal stake in the fight against racism, imperialism and settler-colonialism, voting Yes on Issue 2 is in your best interest.

For a thorough rundown of the campaign and how each of these companies operate to fuel the propagation of racist hate and profiling globally, look to OSU Divests website. This piece will focus specifically on why voting yes on Issue 2 is a vote against anti-Black racism, arguing that prison divestment and divestment from the Israeli occupation go hand-in-hand.

As argued in Ava DuVernays widely acclaimed documentary 13TH, the prison system federal and private is an extension of the economic institution of slavery. Prisons are where seemingly old horrors of plantation slavery are repackaged. Inmates are stripped bare of their constitutional rights, paid a pittance (if anything at all) for the labor they are forced to do and subjected to torture and violence. Private prisons play a gargantuan role in lobbying for legislation that furthers and worsens the racist practice of mass incarceration, motivating the OSU Coalition for Black Liberation to begin the school year with the intention to push forth a prison divestment campaign. In homage to the long history of Black-Palestinian solidarity by virtue of how intricately linked the oppression and exploitation of the two groups are we joined OSU Divest in putting forth a divestment initiative that targets corporations that welcome and depend on oppression and exploitation of both groups.

Countless radical figures, scholars, artists and writers of the Black freedom struggle have expressed unconditional solidarity with Palestine Muhammad Ali, Alice Walker, Malcolm X, Angela Davis, Talib Kweli, Cornel West and many more. Most of these people have signed the Black Solidarity Statement with Palestine. The Movement for Black Lives, the policy platform put forth by Black Lives Matter, also expresses such solidarity. Recently, activists from BLM, the indigenous-people led Standing Rock protesters and Palestinian activists have shown solidarity with one another. For decades now, solidarity between Black people and Palestinians has been organically forged, serving as a testament to the commonality of the oppression of Black people and Palestinians.

Most clearly, both Black people and Palestinians suffer from state-sanctioned violence. BLM, the most recent upsurge of resistance against police brutality, grew widely from the growing consciousness and discontent surrounding the state murders of black people by police. In the early moments of this resistance in Ferguson, Missouri, protesters decrying the murder of Michael Brown were tear-gassed by the Ferguson police. Once news of this went viral, Palestinian activists who were accustomed to dealing with the same brand of tear gas as those in Ferguson, deployed by Israeli Defense Forces tweeted at those in Ferguson remedies to being teargassed. This tells us two things: state-sanctioned murder and brutality relies on the same tactics of repression and violence globally, and that this repression is so great that solidarity between the two groups, Black and Palestinian, is organic in nature.

Calling for the rights of Palestinians and the rights of Black people in the U.S. are not mutually exclusive. These two things are intricately tied, with the fates of both groups reliant on whether the two can work together in solidarity, and whether those who are moved by the atrocities that both groups are subjected to polarize or join us in the fight.

If you are against racism, you must be anti-occupation and anti-mass incarceration. If you are against imperialism, you must be anti-occupation and anti-mass incarceration. If you are against racism and imperialism, vote Yes on Issue 2, but do not let your engagement stop there join the Divest campaign in our fight against oppression at home and abroad.

Sarah Z. Mamo

Fourth-year in African-American and African Studies and Womens, Gender and Sexuality StudiesMember of International Socialist Organization and OSU Coalition for Black Liberation. Organizer with OSU Divest

President Trump has a surprising solution to black violence and the enormous gap between white people and black people in America: Same-old, same-old.

The scene of this epic capitulation was the Oval Office, where this week a posse of black executives from black colleges were happy that the same guy they have vilified for two years seems oddly eager to let bygones be bygones.

Every person in that room knew Trump had only two choices:

1) Grab the entire system of racial preferences and quotas by the stem and pull it out by the roots; or

2) Pretend that system does not promote black on white hostility and violence, and double down with more preferences, more quotas, more stories of relentless black victimization and white racism.

Trump chose Number 2.

Which is nothing more than a repeat of many other solutions for the problems of black colleges and black students over the last 100 years:

More money. More special treatment. Lower standards. Unprepared graduates with degrees in black studies wondering why they cant find a job, then remembering why: White racism is holding them back.

Later, rinse, repeat. Then visit the Museum of African American Racial Hostility at the Smithsonian.

For all the political geniuses out there who are stapling their fingers, getting ready to explain the pure genius of trying to split at least a few black people from the Democratic coalition, dont bother. Every Republican tries it — George Bush with AIDS in Africa ring a bell? How about Condi Rice and Colin Powell? — and it never works.

Maybe this time, this will be different.

The idea is generally grab the graduates of black colleges, send them back to black neighborhoods, where they will preach love, devotion, and surrender. And forget the black on white hostility they learned every day in their black colleges.

Wouldnt it be pretty if that were true?

Instead we get community organizers, who, if they get their way, take eight years to install racial preferences into every nook and cranny of the federal government. Then sit back and wait for racial hell to break loose if Trump tries to touch even one.

Meanwhile, Trump supporters around the country are under violent attack from black people, while MSNBC and others are trying to convince us the opposite is true.

The latest comes from Kettering, Ohio, in the suburbs of Dayton. Over the weekend, a white kid walked out of sports bar where a dozen black people started taunting and harassing and threatening him about Donald Trump.

Stop me if you have heard of this story before in dozens of other places around the country over the last few months: pulling white people out of cars, beating them to the sounds of Trump obscenities. Or my personal favorite, the black person who, just a few days ago, pulled on AR-15 rifle out of the trunk of his car, removed a Trump bumper sticker, then challenged to the owner to stop him.

All on video –all because Trump wants to deport black people back to Africa. I would not have believed that either unless I saw it on video. So here it is:

Four or five of the guys held me down on the hood of my girlfriends car, Jackson told WHIO news. While the biggest one punched me in the face repeatedly. I felt my face break. I was yelling at them and screaming at them, guys you just broke my face. Why? Why are you doing this?

Anyone who attended a black college knows the answer to that question: Black on white violence wildly out of proportion is caused by white racism. Which is everywhere. All the time. And it explains everything. They call it Critical Race Theory — only it is not a theory anymore, it is an industry of books and lectures and movies and lifestyles and TV shows and government programs that is a staple of life on black colleges — and white ones too.

The beating continued, much to the delight and encouragement of other black people kind enough to put some of the encounter on video:

Along with lots of other black on white violence visited upon Trump supporters and ignored by national news. You find that here: Colin Flaherty Trump violence playlist.

Meanwhile, national news continues to try and convince us that Trump supporters (white nationalists all, says NPR) are desecrating Jewish cemeteries in St. Louis and Philadelphia, because this is how white people roll.

Another fairy tale that only makes sense the further you get from those two cities and the closer you get to Washington. Because people who live in and around those two chocolate cities know that large-scale criminality is a black thing.

And unless you went to a black college, you wouldnt understand.

Colin Flaherty is the author of the Amazon #1 Best Sellers, White Girl Bleed a Lot and Dont Make the Black Kids Angry. Subscribe to him on YouTube by clicking here.

President Trump has a surprising solution to black violence and the enormous gap between white people and black people in America: Same-old, same-old.

The scene of this epic capitulation was the Oval Office, where this week a posse of black executives from black colleges were happy that the same guy they have vilified for two years seems oddly eager to let bygones be bygones.

Every person in that room knew Trump had only two choices:

1) Grab the entire system of racial preferences and quotas by the stem and pull it out by the roots; or

2) Pretend that system does not promote black on white hostility and violence, and double down with more preferences, more quotas, more stories of relentless black victimization and white racism.

Trump chose Number 2.

Which is nothing more than a repeat of many other solutions for the problems of black colleges and black students over the last 100 years:

More money. More special treatment. Lower standards. Unprepared graduates with degrees in black studies wondering why they cant find a job, then remembering why: White racism is holding them back.

Later, rinse, repeat. Then visit the Museum of African American Racial Hostility at the Smithsonian.

For all the political geniuses out there who are stapling their fingers, getting ready to explain the pure genius of trying to split at least a few black people from the Democratic coalition, dont bother. Every Republican tries it — George Bush with AIDS in Africa ring a bell? How about Condi Rice and Colin Powell? — and it never works.

Maybe this time, this will be different.

The idea is generally grab the graduates of black colleges, send them back to black neighborhoods, where they will preach love, devotion, and surrender. And forget the black on white hostility they learned every day in their black colleges.

Wouldnt it be pretty if that were true?

Instead we get community organizers, who, if they get their way, take eight years to install racial preferences into every nook and cranny of the federal government. Then sit back and wait for racial hell to break loose if Trump tries to touch even one.

Meanwhile, Trump supporters around the country are under violent attack from black people, while MSNBC and others are trying to convince us the opposite is true.

The latest comes from Kettering, Ohio, in the suburbs of Dayton. Over the weekend, a white kid walked out of sports bar where a dozen black people started taunting and harassing and threatening him about Donald Trump.

Stop me if you have heard of this story before in dozens of other places around the country over the last few months: pulling white people out of cars, beating them to the sounds of Trump obscenities. Or my personal favorite, the black person who, just a few days ago, pulled on AR-15 rifle out of the trunk of his car, removed a Trump bumper sticker, then challenged to the owner to stop him.

All on video –all because Trump wants to deport black people back to Africa. I would not have believed that either unless I saw it on video. So here it is:

Four or five of the guys held me down on the hood of my girlfriends car, Jackson told WHIO news. While the biggest one punched me in the face repeatedly. I felt my face break. I was yelling at them and screaming at them, guys you just broke my face. Why? Why are you doing this?

Anyone who attended a black college knows the answer to that question: Black on white violence wildly out of proportion is caused by white racism. Which is everywhere. All the time. And it explains everything. They call it Critical Race Theory — only it is not a theory anymore, it is an industry of books and lectures and movies and lifestyles and TV shows and government programs that is a staple of life on black colleges — and white ones too.

The beating continued, much to the delight and encouragement of other black people kind enough to put some of the encounter on video:

Along with lots of other black on white violence visited upon Trump supporters and ignored by national news. You find that here: Colin Flaherty Trump violence playlist.

Meanwhile, national news continues to try and convince us that Trump supporters (white nationalists all, says NPR) are desecrating Jewish cemeteries in St. Louis and Philadelphia, because this is how white people roll.

Another fairy tale that only makes sense the further you get from those two cities and the closer you get to Washington. Because people who live in and around those two chocolate cities know that large-scale criminality is a black thing.

And unless you went to a black college, you wouldnt understand.

Colin Flaherty is the author of the Amazon #1 Best Sellers, White Girl Bleed a Lot and Dont Make the Black Kids Angry. Subscribe to him on YouTube by clicking here.

Police, school boards and other key Ottawa institutions are eroding trust within the city’s black community because they aren’t properly acknowledging theexistence of anti-black racism, according to a new report.

Thursday’s report, calledAddressing Anti-Black Racism in Ottawa, was born outof a heavily-attended forumheld in August 2016 that was organized by the City for All Women Initiative and the Ottawa Local Immigration Partnership.

More than300 people attended that forum, which was held one month after the death of Somali-Canadian Abdirahman Abdi during an attempted arrest by Ottawa police. The event had been in the works before Abdi’s death.

ChelbyDaigle, the author of the report, told CBC Ottawa’sAll In A DayThursday that very little in the final version of the report was unexpected.

Anti-black racism has been studied for decades in different Canadian cities, said Daigle, but there have been few concrete steps taken to address it.

Demographic data on Ottawa’s black community found in a new report into systemic anti-black racism released on Feb. 23, 2017. (Addressing Anti-Black Racism in Ottawa)

“So many incidents have happened in Ottawa, but there hasn’t been an inter-generational transfer of that knowledge,” said Daigle.

“Nothing really surprised me. I think that’s the biggest thing to understand I don’t think there’s anything really new in this report,” said Daigle.

The report includes dozens of recommendations aimed atcity police, school boards, social service organizations and local media. A sample:

Chelby Daigle on her anti-black racism report5:20

The report also calls on those organizations to acknowledge the “systemic” anti-black racism within how they operate.

Black community members, meanwhile, are urged to hold those institutions accountable and advocate for their own inclusion on the boards of localsocial service agencies.

“We have to recognize that [anti-black racism] is something we might do unconsciously,” Daigle said. “And the only way we’re going to strategize to make things healthier …. is to name it and understand it.”

On February 4th, the night before the Super Bowl between the Atlanta Falcons and the New England Patriots, comedian and Saturday Night Live actor Michael Che called Boston the most racist city Ive ever been to, during the shows popular Weekend Update segment. The comment didnt garner a lot of attention at the time, but when he repeated his statement on March 23rd at Boston University, it was received with much more acrimony from White folks who felt he had crossed the line and needed to apologize. Che had apparently committed the nouveau unspeakable sin of labelling a White person, a predominantly-White location and a historically White institution, racist. While Ches comments became nationwide fodder for online and offline debates regarding the appropriateness of labelling someone racist, hate crimes were being committed against visible minorities all over the country (you know, actual racism). And in six and a halfweeks between Ches original comment and the latest backlash it caused, there has been ample amounts of racist savagery. This month, 66-year-old Timothy Caughman was stabbed to death by a 28-year-old White man whom, after being arrested, admitted that he came to New York specifically to live out his fantasy of killing Black men, especially so White women would stop dating us. His racist rhetoric not only closely resembles Charleston church shooter Dylan Roofs, but it also mirrors the talking points of Americas historic legacy of anti-Blackness. Its one that traverses many different states throughout the nation. Yet, instead of analyzing that harsh and tragic reality, we must allocate precious time to redirecting the conversation towards actual victims of hate crimes, not those who feel they are because the truth has been hurled at them. Only for them to leave the conversation pretending that anti-Black racism is an unverifiable fallacy. Then we have to search for easily digestible numbers to progress the conversation, since explaining our very real experiences of peril is not enough. But even if Che showed everyone the factsin 2017, the LGBTQ community and Black folks werethe most victimized by hate crimes in Bostonhis detractors would just find another way to minimize or ignore the evidence laying in front of them. Theyre not in it for the truth. Theyre in it for gaslighting the victimized. When White folks make the label of racism the crux of the conversation, they restrict the discourse from progressing to a thorough examination of all the many, very real forms of restrictive and violent racism that plagues our society. By making the claim of racism more egregious than racist behavior, it obfuscates the discussion and leads us away from ever finding meaningful solutions to racialized incursion by framing the word as a subjective pejorative, or even worse, a baseless insult. Its critical that the collective Black community pushes back against the idea that we must diminish our need for a serious dissection of the race problem affecting America and the world at large to accommodate a deluge of fake ass White tears. Those who care more about being called racist than the existence of actual racism are simply just trying to deflect and detract attention away from an issue that determines our safety and progress. And at the rate that hate crime and populism is spreading throughout the globe, theres no damn time to debate the obvious when actual lives are at stake. Lincoln Anthony Blades blogs daily on his site, ThisIsYourConscious.com. Hes author of the book, Youre Not A Victim, Youre A Volunteer. He can be reached on Twitter @lincolnablades and on Facebook at Lincoln Anthony Blades.

Ali Abunimah Activism and BDS Beat 9 March 2017 The BDS movement does not tolerate any act or discourse which adopts or promotes, among others, anti-Black racism, anti-Arab racism, Islamophobia, anti-Semitism, sexism, xenophobia or homophobia. (Guillaume Paumier, CC-BY) Palestinians are reaffirming that the movement to boycott Israel is part of the global struggle against racism and all forms of bigotry, including anti-Semitism and Islamophobia. The global boycott, divestment and sanctions (BDS) movement for freedom, justice and equality of the Palestinian people is an inclusive, nonviolent human rights movement that rejects all forms of racism and racial discrimination, the Palestinian BDS National Committee (BNC) said on Tuesday. We reject Zionism, as it constitutes the racist and discriminatory ideological pillar of Israels regime of occupation, settler-colonialism and apartheid that has deprived the Palestinian people of its fundamental human rights since 1948, the BNC, the civil society coalition that leads the BDS movement, states. Since its inception in 2005, the global, Palestinian-led BDS movement has been anchored in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. It is an inclusive human rights movement that categorically rejects all forms of racism and discrimination, Rafeef Ziadah, a member of the BNC secretariat, told The Electronic Intifada. This key anti-racism statement reiterates this long-held principle at a time when the racist and xenophobic far-right is rising in Washington, DC, Tel Aviv and many places in between. On the centenary of the patently racist and colonial Balfour Declaration which offered Palestine to Jewish-European settlers, disregarding its indigenous Arab population it is crucial to highlight the timeless values of inclusion and opposition to all forms of racism, Ziadah added. The BNCs statement places the Palestinian cause in the broader context of anti-colonial struggle: We strongly condemn apartheid, genocide, slavery, colonial exploitation and ethnic cleansing, which are crimes against humanity that are founded on racism and racial supremacy, and we call for the right of their victims, including descendants, to full reparation. The BNC affirms that the BDS movement does not tolerate any act or discourse which adopts or promotes, among others, anti-Black racism, anti-Arab racism, Islamophobia, anti-Semitism, sexism, xenophobia or homophobia. The principles of the BDS movement call for proactive solidarity with oppressed communities worldwide and with all the victims of racist acts and rhetoric, as ours is a common cause, the BNC adds. There are growing expressions of this commonality. In 2015, more than 1,000 Black artists, intellectuals and organizations recognized the racism that characterizes Israels treatment of Palestinians and called for unified action against anti-Blackness, white supremacy and Zionism. Israel lobby groups have strongly condemned Black support for Palestinian rights and have sought to disrupt such solidarity. While anti-racism has long been affirmed by Palestinian activists, Israel and its surrogates have made a concerted effort to smear the Palestine solidarity movement as motivated by prejudice. This logic treats Israeli supremacy and its denial of Palestinian rights on ethno-religious grounds as if they form part of a legitimate Israeli-Jewish identity that is bound to be cherished and respected, instead of resisted and replaced with a system that affords equal rights and protections to all. A key tactic has been to try to enshrine in legislation and institutional policies around the world a discredited definition of anti-Semitism that treats criticism of Israel and its state ideology Zionism as forms of anti-Jewish bigotry. In recent months, US lawmakers have sought to adopt this definition as part of the so-called Anti-Semitism Awareness bill. Even the lead author of the controversial definition, Kenneth Stern, is warning lawmakers that its adoption would be an unconstitutional infringement on free speech. Secular and religiously observant Jewish communities have also long rejected Israels propaganda conflating Jewish belief and identity on the one hand, with Zionism and support for Israel, on the other. Israel and its lobby groups nonetheless claim that by opposing Israeli abuses the BDS movement is anti-Semitic. Israel has used this smear to push for draconian restrictions on free speech. But a broad pushback by supporters of Palestinian rights is scoring successes. Last year, the European Union joined several of its member governments in recognizing the right of its citizens to boycott Israel. The EU stands firm in protecting freedom of expression and freedom of association in line with the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, which is applicable on EU member states territory, including with regard to BDS, Federica Mogherini, the 28-member blocs foreign policy chief told the European Parliament in September. As Israels regime of occupation, settler-colonialism and apartheid sheds the farcical pretense of democracy and adopts more and more racist and exclusionary laws, the BDS movement is further highlighting its inclusiveness and rejection of all forms of racism, the BNCs Ziadah said. Our struggle for freedom, justice and equality is organically connected to global struggles for racial, social, economic, gender, climate and other forms of justice. See what Switzerland did today in regards to bds? To be fair, it was the Swiss National Council (the lower chamber of the legislature) not the people of Switzerland, just their elected representatives. I’m old enough to remember when Israel claimed solidarity with the peoples of formerly colonized lands. Let’s ask Zionist groups professing anti-racist credentials- assuming that tactic is still in operation- to join in the struggle against anti-black racism and Islamophobic bigotry in the U.S. These are organizations with tremendous financial resources and political connections. Isn’t it about time that the Anti-Defamation League and the World Zionist Organization, to name but two, lent their resources to combating the scourge of racism in the country from which they derive their funding? Their avowed aims of securing the welfare of Jews and constructing a military garrison state in the Middle East have been achieved. Will they now devote themselves to expanding the rights of the oppressed elsewhere (if not in Palestine)? I thought not.

A black student group at York University in Canada is hosting a first aid training session only for black students and describes the accusations of racism for barringwhite students as anti-black racism. The student group,York United Black Students Alliance, got into hot water after a student, Jake Janic, complained publicly via a student Facebook group. Janicposted a picture of the poster which read: catering to black students only. My attention was brought to this poster because I was actually interested in getting my recert[ification] in first aid. Its a skill everyone should know. Apparently my skin color is an issue though, Janic wrote. The poster offering CPR and first aid training is the official poster, as the black student group tweeted the posterthemselves on their official twitter account. The group responded to the backlash, saying thatwhile anyone should be able to access such training, people complaining about the event are doing because of anti-black racism. It has come to the attention of the York United Black Students Alliance that we have anti-black racism in our midst, the statement read. Offering programs such as these to our community members is by no way in any means racist. The York University group added that offering CPR and first aid training exclusivelyfor black students is both a responsibility and a duty because of the oppression at the university. York University since its inception has had a longstanding history of erasure of black bodies, black students, and black space on this campus, the statement added. Unable to put down the controversy, theblack student group issued another statement slamming whiteness and claiming its idiotic for white students to ask to be allowed to attend the training session. For white folks to claim that they need additional space with whiteness subsumed in the entirety of the Canadian context is idiotic. The idea that some folks believe that white supremacy needs to be perpetuated by carving out even more space for white folks is redundant, the group wrote.

York Universitys black student group is offering CPR and first aid training exclusively to black students, defending their discrimination by saying it is part of their DUTY to the black community. An image obtained by MRCTV shows the York United Black Students Alliance is offering the CPR and first aid training catering to black students only: A photo on the groups Twitter page confirms the event is only for black students. In a statement issued on their Facebook page, York United Black Students Alliance blamed anti-black racism for the outrage over their program. The group explained that while learning CPR is something anyone should be able to access, their services are strictly for the black community and that is not, in fact, racist: It has come to the attention of the York United Black Student’s Alliance that we have anti-black racism in our midst. YUBSA recently began an initiative in which we saw the necessity and usefulness of offering CPR certifications to our community members at a reduced cost. This is because being trained on how to properly perform CPR is an important and pivotal undertaking that anyone should be able to access as they offer practical use in life and give an individual the opportunity to potentially save the life of another community member. In our efforts to offer this to our black community members, our endeavors are met with resistance and anti-black racism. YUBSA wants to make this very clear, Offering programs such as these to our community members is by no way in any means racist. The group defended their decision to only offer the program to the black community by mentioning York Universitys alleged longstanding history of erasure of black bodies, black students, and black space on this campus. According to the group, this means they now have a DUTY to only offer services only to black students: WE as a community service group we’re created in 1996 because of the lack of representation that the black students had at York University historically. York University since it’s inception has had a longstanding history of erasure of black bodies, black students, and black space on this campus. Our willingness to carve out space on this campus is an ongoing DUTY of our service group. Our efforts to create more accessible means for our community members to access these programs is a RESPONSIBILITY that we the YUBSA executive have. WE are chosen to represent the interests of the black students at York from an anti-oppressive framework. The group ended their statement by calling for people to keep their anti-black racism in check and for people to do better. The group also addressed the outrage on Twitter, again stating anti-black racism is the cause for the uproar, and claiming the groups services are catered towards black students for a reason: In the midst of the controversy, the York United Black Students Alliance issued another statement claiming whites are not a marginalized group so they do not need their own spaces on campus. The York United Black Students Alliance also encouraged people to file human rights complaints against them so they can collect the receipts of your anti-black racism that York continuously fails to acknowledge is ever present on this campus: For white folks to claim that they need additional space with whiteness subsumed in the entirety of the Canadian context is idiotic. The idea that some folks believe that white supremacy needs to be perpetuated by carving out even more space for white folks is redundant. The fact that we as black students who are cognizant of this history of colonization and exploitation are faced with resistance for wanting to provide support for black community members, when other service groups and cultural student groups do this as well, is a testament to the significant anti-blackness that YUBSA and our black community members face every single day. Do better. To the folks who claim they want to file complaints to human rights for prioritizing Black folks in our most recent endeavor. We encourage this. It saves us the trouble of having to collect the receipts of your anti-black racism that York continuously fails to acknowledge is ever present on this campus. York United Black Students Alliances website claims the purpose of their organization is to provide our Black brothers and sisters the opportunity to access resources that may be unavailable to them otherwise. Their Facebook states the group is an official non-profit, student-run, Pan-Africanist organization that acts as a representative body on behalf of the Black student population at York University, which also operates as agents for social, political, and economic change for the Black community. Thank you for supporting MRCTV! As a tax-deductible, charitable organization, we rely on the support of our readers to keep us running! Keep MRCTV going with your gift here!

10 Shares Share Share Share Email Editors Note: Ranier Maningding is a copywriter and mastermind behind the social justice page The Love Life of an Asian Guy. The opinions expressed in this piece are solely his own. Designed as a two-for-one special, Get Out was both a brilliant horror film with terrifying visuals and a scathing critique of racism in white America. This two-faced presentation meant that if youre woke (aka, you understand how race operates) you were tasked with uncovering all racial symbolism hidden in the film and making sure you didnt shit your pants from all the scary bits. That feel when you simultaneously spot the racial symbolism and shit your pants. As an Asian-American, I walked into Get Outwith the expectation that Id be watching a public roast of white America. A horror movie that depicts cheeky white folks as evil while illuminating the dangers of racial microaggressions? Hell yea! I was pumped for this movie. I walked into that movie theater on opening day with a stride in my step, and two bubble tea drinks stashed inside my fiancees purse. ITS ON LIKE KUBLAI KHAN! But just as I was sipping my hypothetical and literal tea, forty minutes into the film during the cocktail party scene I saw this shit: Is that an Asian dude?! My race-baiting senses flared up. Wait, why is there an Asian dude in this movie? If Get Out is a movie about the mental and physical abuse that white folks inflict on Black people, why did Jordan Peele include an Asian character? Heres why. (SPOILER ALERT: If you havent seen this film, turn around, have a hot pocket, and piss off. Massive spoilers ahead.) Get Out tackles the terrifying experiences of being Black in racist white America, and the inclusion of the Asian man reveals that, while Asians may not play a lead role in white supremacy, our willingness to participate in anti-blackness makes us a supporting character. Why Was There Only One Asian Character? The inclusion of the Asian character was a powerful message, but why did Jordan Peele add one? Why not five? If subtlety was the objective, then one Asian character was enough, but I dont think Peele was trying to be discreet about his commentary on Asians. Instead, the decision to cast one Asian guy mimicked the actual demographics of Asians in America. According to the Pew Research Center, Asian-Americans make up 5.8% of the country. Compared to Black Americans who stand at 13.3%, Asians are even more of a demographic minority. By adding one solitary Asian character, Peele highlights the fact that even though Asians are outnumbered by Black folks, we still take on the role as oppressors by standing on the side of white supremacy and anti-Blackness. Why Did The Asian Man Ask About The African-American Experience? The cocktail party scene was a brilliant way to demonstrate the racial microaggressions and dehumanization that Black folks experience. Upon meeting the white party guests, protagonist Chris (Daniel Kaluuya) was asked a number of rude, racist questions. These specific questions said a lot about the questioner: an old white man who could no longer do sports asked if Chris could swing a golf club like Tiger Woods; an older white woman with a dying husband asked if the stereotypes were true about the big Black penis. When the Asian character made his grand entrance, he asked: Is the African-American experience an advantage or disadvantage? To understand why the Asian man asked this, you have to consider Claire Jean Kims theory of racial triangulation. Racial triangulation posits that Asians exist on a spectrum where they are 1.) perceived as better than Blacks (but not as good as whites) and 2.) categorized as perpetual foreigners who will never be accepted as full Americans. According to racial triangulation, Asians are in racial limbo, trying desperately to achieve whiteness and status as real Americans by stepping on the heads of Black folks. So when the Asian man asked Chris, Is the African-American experience an advantage or disadvantage? he wasnt just making small talk, he was wrestling with the decision of whether or not it would be better to trade bodies with Chris and experience anti-Blackness or stay the same and live life as an Asian man in America and experience xenophobia. Whats Up with The Asian Dude and The Bingo Scene? The infamous bingo scene in Get Outis a modern interpretation of slave auctions. Slave auctions allowed white slave masters to bid on individual slaves as young as three-months-old or bid on entire families of seven or more Black people. So why did Jordan Peele insert the Asian guy into this scene? Because historically, Asian-Americans also owned Black slaves. Though not as common as white slave masters, some Asian-Americans purchased Black slaves. Born in Thailand and forced to join the circus, conjoined twins Chang and Eng Bunker (known as the Original Siamese twins) eventually made enough money to gain naturalization and purchase a plantation with Black slaves. The wealth and socialite status of Chang and Eng propelled them to a position where they could purchase Black slaves and even marry white women. Asian participation in slavery goes back even further than the Bunker twins with some sources citing that Kublai Khan and leaders of the Yuan Dynasty also purchased Black slaves. Painting of Kublai Khan and his Black boy Black servant If you interpret the bingo scene from a hyperbolic lens, you can also argue that the Asian man and his white constituents were participating in the appropriation and degradation of Black bodies a practice weve seen with K-Pops appropriation of Black culture and the violent crimes of Asian-American officers Daniel Holtzclaw and Peter Liang. Asians Must Acknowledge Their Role in Anti-Black Racism If youre an Asian person and reading this, you probably feel pretty damn shitty right now. Good. You should. As Asians, we should feel shitty about Jordan Peele inserting us into his movie. He didnt add a Latino character, or an Indigenous woman, or a Muslim-American. He added an Asian. He wrote this character into the script, sent out a casting call, hired an Asian actor, and gave him lines to read. The Asian character wasnt added on accident. He served a purpose. Now its our job, as Asians, to recognize our complacency under the canopy of white supremacy and realize that like Black folks, we have nothing to gain by siding with whiteness. Its time we wake the fuck up and Get Out of this cycle of anti-Blackness. (Visited 113,777 times, 2,812 visits today)

Now that hes gone from the White House (forever, one hopes), it is time to ascertain when Barack Obama became an overt black racist. Some will opine that he always has been, which may be true, but is less important than the racial divisiveness that occurred on the national scene between 2009 and 2017. I shall eschew commenting on his record as a youth, a community organizer, and an Illinois politico. Lets stick to his legacy at the national level. Some say Obamas dislike of America undergirds what he did, but anti-white sentiments better explain his behavior, especially after 2012. The historian in me says its too soon to have the perspective needed to make any definitive judgments on this topic. The political scientist in me, on the other hand, says Obama has a record and we need to explore it. Since my ultimate graduate degree is in Political Science, I shall apply that disciplines standards. Obama emerged on the national scene with his keynote address at the 2004 Democratic National Convention. We begin there. If you read the transcript of that speech, youd believe that the Barack Obama of 2004 sincerely believed in Americas unity. Aspiring candidates for national office give lip service to views that will play in Peoria, but set that aside. At one point, he told the delegates [t]heres not a black America and white America and Latino America and Asian America; theres the United States of America. He added, [w]e are one people, all of us pledging allegiance to the stars and stripes, all of us defending the United States of America. In his only direct reference to race, Obama criticized the slander that says a black youth with a book is acting white. Elected to the U.S. Senate in 2006, Obama was actively seeking the presidency within months. The gist of his campaign in 2007 and 2008, insofar as it related to the race issue, was to be post-racial. As a product of a mixed-race relationship, Obama could not escape the question of race, which was made even more pertinent following revelations of incendiary remarks by his long-time pastor, Jeremiah Wright. Obama tried to defuse the more divisive implications of Wrights rants in a major address given in mid-March, 2008. Although his acolytes in the mainstream media (MSM) quickly opined that Obama had defused the issue, a careful reading of that speech suggests otherwise. Although, at points, Obama seemed to challenge Wrights belief that racism was endemic and a perpetual feature of American society, he also asserted that the Constitution, even though it contained the principles that would end the institution, was stained by this nations original sin of slavery. He also asserted that he could no more disown Wright than he could either the black community or his white grandmother. Obama stated that blacks and whites all want to move in the same direction, but he eventually made clear that America had much to do to perfect that part of its union pertaining to race, presumably because Americans have never really worked though racial questions. Obama also called for black men to take more responsibility for the children they sired in his 2008 Fathers Day speech in Chicago. That speech, however, caused an outcry among some African American spokesmen. Subsequent Fathers Day addresses did not have overt racial connections. Even after he became Chief Executive, Obama tried to maintain a faade of racial even-handedness, although his nomination of Eric Holder to be Attorney General should have alerted us to potential problems. Almost as soon as Holder became AG, he refused to imprison two New Black Panthers found guilty of voter intimidation in Philadelphia. It wasnt long before the Obama/Holder-led Department of Justice manifested an unwillingness to prosecute African Americans accused of racially motivated violations of whites civil liberties. A turning-point in Obamas statements regarding race occurred in mid-July 2009 when, after Cambridge (MA) police arrested Harvard Professor Henry Gates, Obamas friend, for disorderly conduct, Obama said that, although he did not know all the facts, Cambridge police acted stupidly in arresting Gates. Soon thereafter, Obama was forced to hold a beer summit between himself, Vice President Joe Biden, Prof. Gates, and Cambridge policeman, Sgt. James Crowley. Thereafter, Obamas even-handedness in matters of race became less evident. In the aftermath of white Hispanic George Zimmermans killing of African American Trayvon Martin in 2012, for example, Obama made his sympathies for the latter very obvious. He blurted out that, [i]f I had a son, he would look like Trayvon. The Obama administration and the DOJ provided assistance to the prosecutions ultimately unsuccessful effort to convict Zimmerman. The Obama administration also pursued one-sided policies in the aftermath of the killing of African American Michael Brown by a white Ferguson (MO) policeman on August 9 2014. When race riots immediately broke out, the Obama/Holder-led DOJ sent agents to investigate the gentle giants death, but had to accept a grand jurys decision not to charge Darren Wilson, a decision followed by another round of race riots. By late summer, early fall of 2014, any sense that Obama was interested in racial healing was threadbare. One consequence of the crisis in Ferguson was the emergence of the Black Lives Matter movement, an overtly black racist organization which had begun after the Zimmerman-Martin incident, but had not received nationwide attention. Shortly after a raucus demonstration against police in New York City, Obama invited leaders of this racist clique to visit the White House. In short, Obamas tack vis–vis race had shifted full-bore away from racial harmony. Public opinion polls provide insights into public perceptions of trends in American race relations. Look at the Gallup poll, which asked the same question on several occasions: Would you say relations between whites and blacks are very good, somewhat good, somewhat bad, or very bad. In mid-2008, 70% of whites said race relations were very/somewhat good, 29% opined they were somewhat/very bad, and 2% had no opinion. In mid 2016, 55% thought they were very/somewhat good, 44% opined they were somewhat/very bad, and 1% had no opinion. Among blacks in 2008, 61% thought race relations were very/somewhat good, 37% believed they were somewhat/very bad, and 1% had no opinion. By 2016, 49% of blacks still thought race relations were very/somewhat good, but 50% said they were somewhat/very bad, and less than one percent had no opinion. Some polls show larger shifts in opinions about the state of race relations before and after Obama entered the White House, and they are always toward worsened perspectives, especially among African Americans. Far from being a racial uniter, Obama was a divider. In short, both whites and blacks views of race relations soured while Obama was Chief Executive. If Obama believed that by becoming more overtly racialist, he would witness improvements in blacks perceptions of race relations, he had to be disappointed. One wonders, therefore, what the price of a presidents overt black racism is. Obamas record on race relations indicates what may happen when the MSM refuses to vet an aspiring presidential candidate. Now that hes gone from the White House (forever, one hopes), it is time to ascertain when Barack Obama became an overt black racist. Some will opine that he always has been, which may be true, but is less important than the racial divisiveness that occurred on the national scene between 2009 and 2017. I shall eschew commenting on his record as a youth, a community organizer, and an Illinois politico. Lets stick to his legacy at the national level. Some say Obamas dislike of America undergirds what he did, but anti-white sentiments better explain his behavior, especially after 2012. The historian in me says its too soon to have the perspective needed to make any definitive judgments on this topic. The political scientist in me, on the other hand, says Obama has a record and we need to explore it. Since my ultimate graduate degree is in Political Science, I shall apply that disciplines standards. Obama emerged on the national scene with his keynote address at the 2004 Democratic National Convention. We begin there. If you read the transcript of that speech, youd believe that the Barack Obama of 2004 sincerely believed in Americas unity. Aspiring candidates for national office give lip service to views that will play in Peoria, but set that aside. At one point, he told the delegates [t]heres not a black America and white America and Latino America and Asian America; theres the United States of America. He added, [w]e are one people, all of us pledging allegiance to the stars and stripes, all of us defending the United States of America. In his only direct reference to race, Obama criticized the slander that says a black youth with a book is acting white. Elected to the U.S. Senate in 2006, Obama was actively seeking the presidency within months. The gist of his campaign in 2007 and 2008, insofar as it related to the race issue, was to be post-racial. As a product of a mixed-race relationship, Obama could not escape the question of race, which was made even more pertinent following revelations of incendiary remarks by his long-time pastor, Jeremiah Wright. Obama tried to defuse the more divisive implications of Wrights rants in a major address given in mid-March, 2008. Although his acolytes in the mainstream media (MSM) quickly opined that Obama had defused the issue, a careful reading of that speech suggests otherwise. Although, at points, Obama seemed to challenge Wrights belief that racism was endemic and a perpetual feature of American society, he also asserted that the Constitution, even though it contained the principles that would end the institution, was stained by this nations original sin of slavery. He also asserted that he could no more disown Wright than he could either the black community or his white grandmother. Obama stated that blacks and whites all want to move in the same direction, but he eventually made clear that America had much to do to perfect that part of its union pertaining to race, presumably because Americans have never really worked though racial questions. Obama also called for black men to take more responsibility for the children they sired in his 2008 Fathers Day speech in Chicago. That speech, however, caused an outcry among some African American spokesmen. Subsequent Fathers Day addresses did not have overt racial connections. Even after he became Chief Executive, Obama tried to maintain a faade of racial even-handedness, although his nomination of Eric Holder to be Attorney General should have alerted us to potential problems. Almost as soon as Holder became AG, he refused to imprison two New Black Panthers found guilty of voter intimidation in Philadelphia. It wasnt long before the Obama/Holder-led Department of Justice manifested an unwillingness to prosecute African Americans accused of racially motivated violations of whites civil liberties. A turning-point in Obamas statements regarding race occurred in mid-July 2009 when, after Cambridge (MA) police arrested Harvard Professor Henry Gates, Obamas friend, for disorderly conduct, Obama said that, although he did not know all the facts, Cambridge police acted stupidly in arresting Gates. Soon thereafter, Obama was forced to hold a beer summit between himself, Vice President Joe Biden, Prof. Gates, and Cambridge policeman, Sgt. James Crowley. Thereafter, Obamas even-handedness in matters of race became less evident. In the aftermath of white Hispanic George Zimmermans killing of African American Trayvon Martin in 2012, for example, Obama made his sympathies for the latter very obvious. He blurted out that, [i]f I had a son, he would look like Trayvon. The Obama administration and the DOJ provided assistance to the prosecutions ultimately unsuccessful effort to convict Zimmerman. The Obama administration also pursued one-sided policies in the aftermath of the killing of African American Michael Brown by a white Ferguson (MO) policeman on August 9 2014. When race riots immediately broke out, the Obama/Holder-led DOJ sent agents to investigate the gentle giants death, but had to accept a grand jurys decision not to charge Darren Wilson, a decision followed by another round of race riots. By late summer, early fall of 2014, any sense that Obama was interested in racial healing was threadbare. One consequence of the crisis in Ferguson was the emergence of the Black Lives Matter movement, an overtly black racist organization which had begun after the Zimmerman-Martin incident, but had not received nationwide attention. Shortly after a raucus demonstration against police in New York City, Obama invited leaders of this racist clique to visit the White House. In short, Obamas tack vis–vis race had shifted full-bore away from racial harmony. Public opinion polls provide insights into public perceptions of trends in American race relations. Look at the Gallup poll, which asked the same question on several occasions: Would you say relations between whites and blacks are very good, somewhat good, somewhat bad, or very bad. In mid-2008, 70% of whites said race relations were very/somewhat good, 29% opined they were somewhat/very bad, and 2% had no opinion. In mid 2016, 55% thought they were very/somewhat good, 44% opined they were somewhat/very bad, and 1% had no opinion. Among blacks in 2008, 61% thought race relations were very/somewhat good, 37% believed they were somewhat/very bad, and 1% had no opinion. By 2016, 49% of blacks still thought race relations were very/somewhat good, but 50% said they were somewhat/very bad, and less than one percent had no opinion. Some polls show larger shifts in opinions about the state of race relations before and after Obama entered the White House, and they are always toward worsened perspectives, especially among African Americans. Far from being a racial uniter, Obama was a divider. In short, both whites and blacks views of race relations soured while Obama was Chief Executive. If Obama believed that by becoming more overtly racialist, he would witness improvements in blacks perceptions of race relations, he had to be disappointed. One wonders, therefore, what the price of a presidents overt black racism is. Obamas record on race relations indicates what may happen when the MSM refuses to vet an aspiring presidential candidate.

Please follow and like us: A historical conjecture of solidarity has arrived at Ohio States campus. For the first time in OSUs history, a Black-Palestine solidarity resolution, Issue 2, has been submitted for undergraduate students to vote on. Issue 2 calls upon OSU to revoke and end its investments in companies complicit in the occupation of Palestine such as G4S, Caterpillar and HP as well as its investments in private prison companies such asG4S, GEO and CoreCivic. If you find personal stake in the fight against racism, imperialism and settler-colonialism, voting Yes on Issue 2 is in your best interest. For a thorough rundown of the campaign and how each of these companies operate to fuel the propagation of racist hate and profiling globally, look to OSU Divests website. This piece will focus specifically on why voting yes on Issue 2 is a vote against anti-Black racism, arguing that prison divestment and divestment from the Israeli occupation go hand-in-hand. As argued in Ava DuVernays widely acclaimed documentary 13TH, the prison system federal and private is an extension of the economic institution of slavery. Prisons are where seemingly old horrors of plantation slavery are repackaged. Inmates are stripped bare of their constitutional rights, paid a pittance (if anything at all) for the labor they are forced to do and subjected to torture and violence. Private prisons play a gargantuan role in lobbying for legislation that furthers and worsens the racist practice of mass incarceration, motivating the OSU Coalition for Black Liberation to begin the school year with the intention to push forth a prison divestment campaign. In homage to the long history of Black-Palestinian solidarity by virtue of how intricately linked the oppression and exploitation of the two groups are we joined OSU Divest in putting forth a divestment initiative that targets corporations that welcome and depend on oppression and exploitation of both groups. Countless radical figures, scholars, artists and writers of the Black freedom struggle have expressed unconditional solidarity with Palestine Muhammad Ali, Alice Walker, Malcolm X, Angela Davis, Talib Kweli, Cornel West and many more. Most of these people have signed the Black Solidarity Statement with Palestine. The Movement for Black Lives, the policy platform put forth by Black Lives Matter, also expresses such solidarity. Recently, activists from BLM, the indigenous-people led Standing Rock protesters and Palestinian activists have shown solidarity with one another. For decades now, solidarity between Black people and Palestinians has been organically forged, serving as a testament to the commonality of the oppression of Black people and Palestinians. Most clearly, both Black people and Palestinians suffer from state-sanctioned violence. BLM, the most recent upsurge of resistance against police brutality, grew widely from the growing consciousness and discontent surrounding the state murders of black people by police. In the early moments of this resistance in Ferguson, Missouri, protesters decrying the murder of Michael Brown were tear-gassed by the Ferguson police. Once news of this went viral, Palestinian activists who were accustomed to dealing with the same brand of tear gas as those in Ferguson, deployed by Israeli Defense Forces tweeted at those in Ferguson remedies to being teargassed. This tells us two things: state-sanctioned murder and brutality relies on the same tactics of repression and violence globally, and that this repression is so great that solidarity between the two groups, Black and Palestinian, is organic in nature. Calling for the rights of Palestinians and the rights of Black people in the U.S. are not mutually exclusive. These two things are intricately tied, with the fates of both groups reliant on whether the two can work together in solidarity, and whether those who are moved by the atrocities that both groups are subjected to polarize or join us in the fight. If you are against racism, you must be anti-occupation and anti-mass incarceration. If you are against imperialism, you must be anti-occupation and anti-mass incarceration. If you are against racism and imperialism, vote Yes on Issue 2, but do not let your engagement stop there join the Divest campaign in our fight against oppression at home and abroad. Sarah Z. Mamo Fourth-year in African-American and African Studies and Womens, Gender and Sexuality StudiesMember of International Socialist Organization and OSU Coalition for Black Liberation. Organizer with OSU Divest

President Trump has a surprising solution to black violence and the enormous gap between white people and black people in America: Same-old, same-old. The scene of this epic capitulation was the Oval Office, where this week a posse of black executives from black colleges were happy that the same guy they have vilified for two years seems oddly eager to let bygones be bygones. Every person in that room knew Trump had only two choices: 1) Grab the entire system of racial preferences and quotas by the stem and pull it out by the roots; or 2) Pretend that system does not promote black on white hostility and violence, and double down with more preferences, more quotas, more stories of relentless black victimization and white racism. Trump chose Number 2. Which is nothing more than a repeat of many other solutions for the problems of black colleges and black students over the last 100 years: More money. More special treatment. Lower standards. Unprepared graduates with degrees in black studies wondering why they cant find a job, then remembering why: White racism is holding them back. Later, rinse, repeat. Then visit the Museum of African American Racial Hostility at the Smithsonian. For all the political geniuses out there who are stapling their fingers, getting ready to explain the pure genius of trying to split at least a few black people from the Democratic coalition, dont bother. Every Republican tries it — George Bush with AIDS in Africa ring a bell? How about Condi Rice and Colin Powell? — and it never works. Maybe this time, this will be different. The idea is generally grab the graduates of black colleges, send them back to black neighborhoods, where they will preach love, devotion, and surrender. And forget the black on white hostility they learned every day in their black colleges. Wouldnt it be pretty if that were true? Instead we get community organizers, who, if they get their way, take eight years to install racial preferences into every nook and cranny of the federal government. Then sit back and wait for racial hell to break loose if Trump tries to touch even one. Meanwhile, Trump supporters around the country are under violent attack from black people, while MSNBC and others are trying to convince us the opposite is true. The latest comes from Kettering, Ohio, in the suburbs of Dayton. Over the weekend, a white kid walked out of sports bar where a dozen black people started taunting and harassing and threatening him about Donald Trump. Stop me if you have heard of this story before in dozens of other places around the country over the last few months: pulling white people out of cars, beating them to the sounds of Trump obscenities. Or my personal favorite, the black person who, just a few days ago, pulled on AR-15 rifle out of the trunk of his car, removed a Trump bumper sticker, then challenged to the owner to stop him. All on video –all because Trump wants to deport black people back to Africa. I would not have believed that either unless I saw it on video. So here it is: Four or five of the guys held me down on the hood of my girlfriends car, Jackson told WHIO news. While the biggest one punched me in the face repeatedly. I felt my face break. I was yelling at them and screaming at them, guys you just broke my face. Why? Why are you doing this? Anyone who attended a black college knows the answer to that question: Black on white violence wildly out of proportion is caused by white racism. Which is everywhere. All the time. And it explains everything. They call it Critical Race Theory — only it is not a theory anymore, it is an industry of books and lectures and movies and lifestyles and TV shows and government programs that is a staple of life on black colleges — and white ones too. The beating continued, much to the delight and encouragement of other black people kind enough to put some of the encounter on video: Along with lots of other black on white violence visited upon Trump supporters and ignored by national news. You find that here: Colin Flaherty Trump violence playlist. Meanwhile, national news continues to try and convince us that Trump supporters (white nationalists all, says NPR) are desecrating Jewish cemeteries in St. Louis and Philadelphia, because this is how white people roll. Another fairy tale that only makes sense the further you get from those two cities and the closer you get to Washington. Because people who live in and around those two chocolate cities know that large-scale criminality is a black thing. And unless you went to a black college, you wouldnt understand. Colin Flaherty is the author of the Amazon #1 Best Sellers, White Girl Bleed a Lot and Dont Make the Black Kids Angry. Subscribe to him on YouTube by clicking here. President Trump has a surprising solution to black violence and the enormous gap between white people and black people in America: Same-old, same-old. The scene of this epic capitulation was the Oval Office, where this week a posse of black executives from black colleges were happy that the same guy they have vilified for two years seems oddly eager to let bygones be bygones. Every person in that room knew Trump had only two choices: 1) Grab the entire system of racial preferences and quotas by the stem and pull it out by the roots; or 2) Pretend that system does not promote black on white hostility and violence, and double down with more preferences, more quotas, more stories of relentless black victimization and white racism. Trump chose Number 2. Which is nothing more than a repeat of many other solutions for the problems of black colleges and black students over the last 100 years: More money. More special treatment. Lower standards. Unprepared graduates with degrees in black studies wondering why they cant find a job, then remembering why: White racism is holding them back. Later, rinse, repeat. Then visit the Museum of African American Racial Hostility at the Smithsonian. For all the political geniuses out there who are stapling their fingers, getting ready to explain the pure genius of trying to split at least a few black people from the Democratic coalition, dont bother. Every Republican tries it — George Bush with AIDS in Africa ring a bell? How about Condi Rice and Colin Powell? — and it never works. Maybe this time, this will be different. The idea is generally grab the graduates of black colleges, send them back to black neighborhoods, where they will preach love, devotion, and surrender. And forget the black on white hostility they learned every day in their black colleges. Wouldnt it be pretty if that were true? Instead we get community organizers, who, if they get their way, take eight years to install racial preferences into every nook and cranny of the federal government. Then sit back and wait for racial hell to break loose if Trump tries to touch even one. Meanwhile, Trump supporters around the country are under violent attack from black people, while MSNBC and others are trying to convince us the opposite is true. The latest comes from Kettering, Ohio, in the suburbs of Dayton. Over the weekend, a white kid walked out of sports bar where a dozen black people started taunting and harassing and threatening him about Donald Trump. Stop me if you have heard of this story before in dozens of other places around the country over the last few months: pulling white people out of cars, beating them to the sounds of Trump obscenities. Or my personal favorite, the black person who, just a few days ago, pulled on AR-15 rifle out of the trunk of his car, removed a Trump bumper sticker, then challenged to the owner to stop him. All on video –all because Trump wants to deport black people back to Africa. I would not have believed that either unless I saw it on video. So here it is: Four or five of the guys held me down on the hood of my girlfriends car, Jackson told WHIO news. While the biggest one punched me in the face repeatedly. I felt my face break. I was yelling at them and screaming at them, guys you just broke my face. Why? Why are you doing this? Anyone who attended a black college knows the answer to that question: Black on white violence wildly out of proportion is caused by white racism. Which is everywhere. All the time. And it explains everything. They call it Critical Race Theory — only it is not a theory anymore, it is an industry of books and lectures and movies and lifestyles and TV shows and government programs that is a staple of life on black colleges — and white ones too. The beating continued, much to the delight and encouragement of other black people kind enough to put some of the encounter on video: Along with lots of other black on white violence visited upon Trump supporters and ignored by national news. You find that here: Colin Flaherty Trump violence playlist. Meanwhile, national news continues to try and convince us that Trump supporters (white nationalists all, says NPR) are desecrating Jewish cemeteries in St. Louis and Philadelphia, because this is how white people roll. Another fairy tale that only makes sense the further you get from those two cities and the closer you get to Washington. Because people who live in and around those two chocolate cities know that large-scale criminality is a black thing. And unless you went to a black college, you wouldnt understand. Colin Flaherty is the author of the Amazon #1 Best Sellers, White Girl Bleed a Lot and Dont Make the Black Kids Angry. Subscribe to him on YouTube by clicking here.

Police, school boards and other key Ottawa institutions are eroding trust within the city’s black community because they aren’t properly acknowledging theexistence of anti-black racism, according to a new report. Thursday’s report, calledAddressing Anti-Black Racism in Ottawa, was born outof a heavily-attended forumheld in August 2016 that was organized by the City for All Women Initiative and the Ottawa Local Immigration Partnership. More than300 people attended that forum, which was held one month after the death of Somali-Canadian Abdirahman Abdi during an attempted arrest by Ottawa police. The event had been in the works before Abdi’s death. ChelbyDaigle, the author of the report, told CBC Ottawa’sAll In A DayThursday that very little in the final version of the report was unexpected. Anti-black racism has been studied for decades in different Canadian cities, said Daigle, but there have been few concrete steps taken to address it. Demographic data on Ottawa’s black community found in a new report into systemic anti-black racism released on Feb. 23, 2017. (Addressing Anti-Black Racism in Ottawa) “So many incidents have happened in Ottawa, but there hasn’t been an inter-generational transfer of that knowledge,” said Daigle. “Nothing really surprised me. I think that’s the biggest thing to understand I don’t think there’s anything really new in this report,” said Daigle. The report includes dozens of recommendations aimed atcity police, school boards, social service organizations and local media. A sample: Chelby Daigle on her anti-black racism report5:20 The report also calls on those organizations to acknowledge the “systemic” anti-black racism within how they operate. Black community members, meanwhile, are urged to hold those institutions accountable and advocate for their own inclusion on the boards of localsocial service agencies. “We have to recognize that [anti-black racism] is something we might do unconsciously,” Daigle said. “And the only way we’re going to strategize to make things healthier …. is to name it and understand it.”

"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion,
or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of
speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to
assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances."

Under the 'fair use' rule of copyright law, an author may make limited use of another author's work without asking permission. Fair use is based on the belief that the public is entitled to freely use portions of copyrighted materials for purposes of commentary and criticism. The fair use privilege is perhaps the most significant limitation on a copyright owner's exclusive rights.

Fair use as described at 17 U.S.C. Section 107:

"Notwithstanding the provisions of section 106 and 106A, the fair use of a copyrighted work, including such use by reproduction in copies or phono-records or by any other means specified by that section, for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching (including multiple copies for classroom use), scholarship, or research, is not an infringement of copyright.

In determining whether the use made of a work in any particular case is a fair use the factors to be considered shall include:

(1) the purpose and character of the use, including whether such use is of a commercial nature or is for or nonprofit educational purposes,

(2) the nature of the copyrighted work,

(3) the amount and substantiality of the portion used in relation to the copyrighted work as a whole, and

(4) the effect of the use upon the potential market for or value of the copyrighted work."